DogOnPorch Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 The Israelis continue to implement their...etc. Attacking Israel in hopes of driving the population into the Med was a bad idea, after-all. Don't try it again would be my suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 Attacking Israel in hopes of driving the population into the Med was a bad idea, after-all. Don't try it again would be my suggestion. So "might is right" and "the end justifies the means" is the key to foreign relations. Seems to also work in the Ukraine, Syria, ISIL, and most dictatorships. So maybe future president of the USA, Donald Trump, is correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Mayers Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) Again you display this false sense of self-an inflated one where you pose yourself as smarter than those who disagree with you and try insult and patronize them when they disagree with your opinions,, Again you display a narcissistic defect and are unable to discuss the issues presented to youw without referring back to youself and inflating your sense of self,. Listen up, Rue, I'm fine with who I am regardless of what you think. Perhaps you could try to have respect yourself before you judge me. As for others I speak with here, not everyone takes dissenting views with personal insult as you do. I've asked you to treat me with respect here (like to appropriately use my name) and to at least give me the charity to which I did with you initially. So if you don't like me, don't bother speaking to me. I won't respond to your own abusive behavior and lack of responding to what I actually say rather than to fake something I didn't say (or mean). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1c2OfAzDTI Edited March 11, 2016 by Scott Mayers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 Listen up, Rue, I'm fine with who I am regardless of what you think. .. Please do not get discouraged. I do read and agree with many parts of your presentations. Most are worth the read - lengthy posts generally turn me off - short attention span. The activities of the current Israeli far right government are an anathema to most impartial observers and something to be protected by the Zionist zealots. I have given up with the cheerleaders and try to let the daily facts speak for themselves. I believe the world is now watching more closely of what is happening in Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 So "might is right" and "the end justifies the means" is the key to foreign relations. Seems to also work in the Ukraine, Syria, ISIL, and most dictatorships. So maybe future president of the USA, Donald Trump, is correct? The Arabs certainly feel might is right. Israel has never attacked the Arabs w/o first being attacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 It's simple for me... -Hajj Amin al-Husseini started the Palestinian Cause as the dust of the Ottoman Empire was still settling. -He joined Hitler and participated in the Final Solution (The Holocaust)...then went on to start the Arab-Israeli Conflict. His nephew, Arafat, used international terrorism to further the Palestinian Cause's dastardly aims. -Nazis are bad and I do not support them. Nor their pet Jew-free causes. -His fascist Cause should eliminated (Hamas and Fatah...et al) and the "refugees" resulting from his aggression absorbed by neighboring Arab nations that haven't imploded as of yet...but did participate in the conflict. Jordan and Saudi Arabia being the logical culprits to enjoy this privilege. -Gaza should rejoin Egypt. The West Bank...turn it into a giant theme park. Religious Nut-bar Land. Charge admission. ...last bit a joke. Maybe.... This is about as simplistic a broad-stroke expression of Godwin's Law as there ever was. The little yuck at the end kinda underscores it's irrelevance and triviality. We get it already, Palestinians are Nazis and anyone who disses that opinion is too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 This is about as simplistic a broad-stroke expression of Godwin's Law as there ever was. The little yuck at the end kinda underscores it's irrelevance and triviality. We get it already, Palestinians are Nazis and anyone who disses that opinion is too. You're free to support Fatah and Hamas. I won't stop you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 The Arabs certainly feel might is right. Israel has never attacked the Arabs w/o first being attacked. Thank you for your response. I really do not know what Arabs feel or what Israelis feel. I do note what actions take place in that region. Because of those actions - on both sides - I have developed my views on the what I support and what I do not. I assume that you are privy to the same actions and have the right to interpret those actions in any manner you like. You interpretation appears to be different from mine. Good for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Thank you for your response. I really do not know what Arabs feel or what Israelis feel. I do note what actions take place in that region. Because of those actions - on both sides - I have developed my views on the what I support and what I do not. I assume that you are privy to the same actions and have the right to interpret those actions in any manner you like. You interpretation appears to be different from mine. Good for you. 1948: Arabs started the war. 1967: Arabs started the war. 1973: Arabs started the war. What's your version? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Mayers Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 (edited) 1948: Arabs started the war. 1967: Arabs started the war. 1973: Arabs started the war. What's your version? Zionism and its attempts to overtake Palestine began in the mid-to-late 1800s, not merely 1948. But you need to simply question the logic for which you keep overlooking. In 1975, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution that designated Zionism as "a form of racism and racial discrimination". The resolution was repealed in 1991 by replacing Resolution 3379 with United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/86. Within the context of the Arab–Israeli conflict, Zionism is viewed by critics as a system that fosters apartheid and racism. [stefan Goranov, "Racism: A Basic Principle of Zionism" in Zionism and Racism. Proceedings of an International Symposium. The International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. New Brunswick. North America, 1979. 262p] The nature of the belief of Zionism is intrinsically National Socialist since it restricts its political structure to be of Jewish people, both of Judaic beliefs AND to their genetic ancestral relations...AND that it also EXCLUDES the non-Jew, with most high disrespect, of the very Palestinians of which was the 'host' to any Jewish immigration. It disrespected the local population and depended on dealing with external sovereign places to force their way in at the expense of the DEMOCRATIC concerns of the Palestinians living there. Thus, Zionism is a Jewish form of ANTI-Palestinian or ANTI-(any others who threaten their resolve) kind of cult. So the Zionists were the ones initiating the harms FIRST and continue to this day. Edited March 12, 2016 by Scott Mayers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 You're free to support Fatah and Hamas. I won't stop you. Don't worry I'm content to stay as far away from the place as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Zionism and its attempts to overtake Palestine began in the mid-to-late 1800s, not merely 1948. But you need to simply question the logic for which you keep overlooking. The nature of the belief of Zionism is intrinsically National Socialist since it restricts its political structure to be of Jewish people, both of Judaic beliefs AND to their genetic ancestral relations...AND that it also EXCLUDES the non-Jew, with most high disrespect, of the very Palestinians of which was the 'host' to any Jewish immigration. It disrespected the local population and depended on dealing with external sovereign places to force their way in at the expense of the DEMOCRATIC concerns of the Palestinians living there. Thus, Zionism is a Jewish form of ANTI-Palestinian or ANTI-(any others who threaten their resolve) kind of cult. So the Zionists were the ones initiating the harms FIRST and continue to this day. Oh my, you're a live one, eh? Explain this... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Safed_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1834_looting_of_Safed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1517_Safed_attacks So those darn Jew Zionists were busy invading precious Arab lands in 1517? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Don't worry I'm content to stay as far away from the place as possible. Except for now. Your participation here is completely voluntary... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Israel has the only free press in the middle east, and the only democracy. It is the only country in the middle east with an independent court system. It is also the only country in the middle east without the death penalty. It is the only country in the middle east with protections for womens rights and gay rights. Seems like the task of bringing Democracy to other parts of the Middle East is failing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Seems like the task of bringing Democracy to other parts of the Middle East is failing. Is that Israel's job?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Antisemitism is a word coined by Wilhelm Marr to describe hatred of Jews. Not something else. The Mufti al-Husseini was the founder of the Cause and a dyed-in-the-wool antisemite. So who here on this board hates Jews? That's right .. no one. But people keep beating that dead horse hoping it will respond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 So who here on this board hates Jews? That's right .. no one. But people keep beating that dead horse hoping it will respond. You speak for everybody posting? Okay... Either way, you can't get around the fact that the Palestinian Cause was founded by a real Nazi involved in the Final Solution. Try as you might... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 You speak for everybody posting? Okay... Either way, you can't get around the fact that the Palestinian Cause was founded by a real Nazi involved in the Final Solution. Try as you might... There are a select few, you included, that keep trying to pin anti-semitism on other members. Hasn't been working out for you, has it! But I encourage you to keep trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Except for now. Your participation here is completely voluntary... Yes it is and I think its about time to wrap it up and sign off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 That goes without saying. You have evaded responding to my response to your accusations and assumptions of who is abusing who in the Middle East. Drivel. Everyone in the middle east is abusing everyone else in one way, shape or form. Sow what? That was a response to your accusation that Aljazeera is a phony organization with its own biased motive without qualification and to the fact it is of a severe minority with respect to Western media. It is certainly a highly biased media source, much as RT or FOX are. Most western media sources are not nearly so biased. Your purpose is to disqualify ANY dissenting view by dismissing that media as a whole with severe prejudice. No, it was to dismiss the story as absurdly one-sided, which it was. Your accent placed to the 'logic of the Jew' is not one I endorse as you are inappropriately presenting me as implying ALL Jews have some common logic. The 'logic' is the rationale of the Zionist Jews who PARTICULARLY initiated the take over of Palestine and have succeeded. Your fixation on the origins of the state of Israel is absurd. The area was a minor province of the Ottoman Empire and was then being administered by the UN. Why Jews lived there or moved there is irrelevant. The UN divided up the territory between an Arab nation and a Jewish one. Had it not been for the military intervention of hostile Arab nations there would have been no real violence. Why did Egypt invade the new state of Israel? Why did Jordan? Why did Syria? The 'legality' is moot as is the 'legality' of those committing atrocities of the Holocaust. The explanation given by those accused of Nazi crimes was that "they were just following orders". That is, the LAW of the present Germany they were a function of LEGITIMIZED (that is, LEGALIZED) their right to behave. That is a noxious comparison. Selling a deed to a Jew is not comparable to gassing people in ovens for BEING Jews. Why did the U.N. sanction Jews to have a right to Palestine instead of to the lands that they were from? A lot of the Jews were FROM that area. Others had moved their years or decades earlier. A lot of Muslims were also relative newcomers, the population having doubled during the decades the British were in charge, many having fled from other places.for a variety of reasons. Do the Muslims who fled Egypt or Bosnia-Herzegovena in the '20s and '30s have more right to the land than the Jews who fled Europe in the '30s and '40s? Why? This was not a country of any sort, and the term "Palestinian" had no ethnic, legal, religious, nationalist or racial significance. They were not a 'people' but a collection of peoples who had arrived from elsewhere, and the area had never been self-governing, nor wanted to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 So who here on this board hates Jews? Several people, but none who are willing to admit it openly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Seems like the task of bringing Democracy to other parts of the Middle East is failing. That is because Islam seems to be quite hostile to democracy. That is why there are no genuine Muslim democracies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Mayers Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 (edited) Oh my, you're a live one, eh? Explain this... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Safed_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1834_looting_of_Safed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1517_Safed_attacks So those darn Jew Zionists were busy invading precious Arab lands in 1517? Wait a second. You still miss the logic. I don't support any "Nationalism" where such is defined on some specific ethnicity, regardless of whether it is from Muslims or not. Palestine was NOT a political state of the Jews prior to their relatively recent takeover of this region. As such, if the Jews had this land, even still disagreeing with their ethnocentric racism, in a reversed condition such that the Muslims had forced a state instead, I'd disagree with those Muslims for overtaking the Jews who would have been there before. So it is NOT about which Nationalism is better or worse because BOTH forms are racist and unworthy of supporting (Unless those like you have a belief in your own 'race' and simply agree to such Nationalism). The point of the matter is that those who ARE Zionists ("Jewish Zionists" is redundant here) used their racism to redefine Palestine in disrespect of the political STATE of those there before them. It wouldn't matter if the people living in Palestine for the last two thousand years were German Nazis. To simply say that those people are evil does not justify replacing them just with another form of Nazism. Two wrongs don't make a right. So we have to look to the logic of the secondary conditions as outsiders looking in on these different peoples OBJECTIVELY. This is like if we had to judge two inmates of some prison who are both violent criminals to determine whether one is acting in ways that are relatively more unjust than the other. That is, we still don't think it appropriate for one criminal inmate to kill another inmate. We don't excuse the fact that one of them did some other heinous crime as justification to allow the lessor of the two evils to have carte blanche justice to offend the other. Note, I DO get that many peole DO think this type of behavior is alright. If one is a child predator while the other is simply a predator of an adult, one may interpret the offender against adults as "justified" in murdering the child predator in prison. But for that matter, outsiders may simply interpret both as equally deserving whatever evolves in those prisons regardless of who is more or less abusive. So, if you think Israel earns their right because of might in light that both are evil but you think Israel's crimes are lessor than the Palestinians before them, why not close off your concern for BOTH sides? Why support even Israel's existence at all even if you think they were simply "lessor" of the evils? Shouldn't you just stay out of the issue altogether? Should WE, the rest of the World, ignore problems altogether in the Middle East? If you still think the Israeli side should be supported, I then have to question whether you yourself have some personal Nationalistic belief too. While you do NOT have to be a Jew to support Israel, if you support their 'right' over the Palestinians, it indicates you have some other personal belief in your own form of Nationalism and only side with Israel out of a better affinity to their culture over the Palestinians. It would be like favoring one violent gang over another simply because you might prefer the appearance of one over the other. You treat the dispute like a sports event in which you are entertained by the competition but happen to have loyalty to one side simply because they have uniforms with colors you like (that is, relate to). Edited March 12, 2016 by Scott Mayers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Mayers Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 Is that Israel's job??Israel is selectively "democratic". That's the "nationalist" part:...that one must be Jewish to be granted priority in law-making. Had they been sincerely 'democratic', they'd not have been interested in creating a Zionistic State for Jews but to establish a friendly democracy collectively among ALL people in that region. The "National" part of "National Socialism" means that one believes in a selective socialist system specifically for some favored 'nationality' (the ethnic-intensive meaning). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted March 12, 2016 Report Share Posted March 12, 2016 (edited) If you still think the Israeli side should be supported, I then have to question whether you yourself have some personal Nationalistic belief too. While you do NOT have to be a Jew to support Israel, if you support their 'right' over the Palestinians, it indicates you have some other personal belief in your own form of Nationalism and only side with Israel out of a better affinity to their culture over the Palestinians. It would be like favoring one violent gang over another simply because you might prefer the appearance of one over the other. You treat the dispute like a sports event in which you are entertained by the competition but happen to have loyalty to one side simply because they have uniforms with colors you like (that is, relate to). Mr. Mayers, you again tell someone how they think. Your again create a stereotype of what you think someone believes and project it upon them as if its fact. In do doing you again demonstrate your narcissistic defect, your inability to differentiate your own thoughts from those of others and think they are one and the same. Edited March 12, 2016 by Rue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts